So it seems that if we licence on crate in the repository under the GPL-3 licence, we are supposed to licence everything under GPL3 if it is in the same repository. See the following answer I got:
If you create a Rust crate and license it under the GPL-3 license, then you would need to license the entire repository that contains the crate under the GPL-3 license as well. The GPL-3 license is a copyleft license, which means that any derivative works, including the entire repository that contains the Rust crate, must be released under the same license.
This means that anyone who wants to use the code in your repository, including the Rust crate, would need to comply with the terms of the GPL-3 license, including releasing any derivative works under the GPL-3 license.
It's important to keep in mind that the GPL-3 license has a number of specific requirements, such as providing copies of the source code and displaying a copy of the license. It's good practice to include a copy of the GPL-3 license in the repository, as well as to indicate in the repository's README file or in other documentation that the repository is licensed under the GPL-3 license.
It's also worth noting that GPL-3 is not the only open-source license available and you can choose a different license that better fits your needs or project if you want to.
Hence, we might want to extract the DCAP GPL3 licenced stuff into a separate repository so that we don't need to licence the entire repository under GPL3.
So it seems that if we licence on crate in the repository under the GPL-3 licence, we are supposed to licence everything under GPL3 if it is in the same repository. See the following answer I got:
Hence, we might want to extract the DCAP GPL3 licenced stuff into a separate repository so that we don't need to licence the entire repository under GPL3.